The Record: Christie and pensions

The Record

WHEN GOVERNOR Christie signed a pension reform bill in June 2011, he was supported by key Democrats, most notably state Senate President Stephen Sweeney, D-Gloucester. Reducing shortfalls in the state pension system by increasing employee contributions was the type of heavy lift that demanded true bipartisanship.

Chris Pedota/staff photographer

Governor Christie

Similar cooperation is again needed if the governor is going to get a new round of pension changes through the Legislature, but as of now, it's not happening. Instead of reaching out to Democratic lawmakers, the governor seems intent on trying to do it alone.

Christie has been holding town-hall-style meetings across the state this summer and championing generic pension reform through a mystifying slogan, "No Pain, No Gain." That's a trivial way to deal with a system that is underfunded by an estimated $40 billion.

The governor emphasized the need for more reform earlier this year when he cut the state's contribution into the pension system by about $2.4 billion over the last two budget years, saying the state couldn't afford the payments. And last week, the governor named a nine-member commission to study the pension system and to recommend reforms. According to the governor's office, the commission's charge is to "think big."

Christie previously named a panel to recommend ways to reduce gun violence in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre in Newtown, Conn. The result was a series of largely innocuous proposals. A few summers ago, then-Gov. Jon Corzine convened a special session of the Legislature to tackle property tax reform. Many good proposals were made, but Corzine failed to implement most of them. That's the problem with so-called blue-ribbon panels. Even if the ideas are good, they can be ignored.

Christie stresses that the pension study committee is filled with actuarial, accounting and financial professionals as opposed to politicians. Still, politics have not been totally removed. The panel includes Tom Byrne, a past chairman of the state Democratic Committee, and philanthropist Raymond Chambers, who has contributed about $470,000 to political candidates over the last 30 years.

No matter what the panel recommends, it is the governor's commission. It will then be the governor's job to convince the Democratic-controlled Legislature to adopt the proposals.

No one should expect that to be easy. Sweeney and other party leaders were harshly criticized by the state's public unions, a key Democratic constituency, for supporting the 2011 pension reform bill. Don't be surprised if they are unwilling to support additional reforms conceived by a panel named by the Republican governor.

There is nothing phony about the pension crisis. It may not affect current retirees, but unless changes are made, it likely will affect public workers who retire in the years ahead.

Reform can't happen without Democratic support. Rather than name a study commission unilaterally, it would have been preferable for the governor to bring Democratic leaders into the pension deliberations from the start. Bipartisanship is needed at the beginning of the process, not only when it's time to vote.

The Record: Christie and pensions

WHEN GOVERNOR Christie signed a pension reform bill in June 2011, he was supported by key Democrats, most notably state Senate President Stephen Sweeney, D-Gloucester. Reducing shortfalls in the state pension system by increasing employee contributions was the type of heavy lift that demanded true bipartisanship.

Similar cooperation is again needed if the governor is going to get a new round of pension changes through the Legislature, but as of now, it's not happening. Instead of reaching out to Democratic lawmakers, the governor seems intent on trying to do it alone.

Christie has been holding town-hall-style meetings across the state this summer and championing generic pension reform through a mystifying slogan, "No Pain, No Gain." That's a trivial way to deal with a system that is underfunded by an estimated $40 billion.

The governor emphasized the need for more reform earlier this year when he cut the state's contribution into the pension system by about $2.4 billion over the last two budget years, saying the state couldn't afford the payments. And last week, the governor named a nine-member commission to study the pension system and to recommend reforms. According to the governor's office, the commission's charge is to "think big."

Christie previously named a panel to recommend ways to reduce gun violence in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre in Newtown, Conn. The result was a series of largely innocuous proposals. A few summers ago, then-Gov. Jon Corzine convened a special session of the Legislature to tackle property tax reform. Many good proposals were made, but Corzine failed to implement most of them. That's the problem with so-called blue-ribbon panels. Even if the ideas are good, they can be ignored.

Christie stresses that the pension study committee is filled with actuarial, accounting and financial professionals as opposed to politicians. Still, politics have not been totally removed. The panel includes Tom Byrne, a past chairman of the state Democratic Committee, and philanthropist Raymond Chambers, who has contributed about $470,000 to political candidates over the last 30 years.

No matter what the panel recommends, it is the governor's commission. It will then be the governor's job to convince the Democratic-controlled Legislature to adopt the proposals.

No one should expect that to be easy. Sweeney and other party leaders were harshly criticized by the state's public unions, a key Democratic constituency, for supporting the 2011 pension reform bill. Don't be surprised if they are unwilling to support additional reforms conceived by a panel named by the Republican governor.

There is nothing phony about the pension crisis. It may not affect current retirees, but unless changes are made, it likely will affect public workers who retire in the years ahead.

Reform can't happen without Democratic support. Rather than name a study commission unilaterally, it would have been preferable for the governor to bring Democratic leaders into the pension deliberations from the start. Bipartisanship is needed at the beginning of the process, not only when it's time to vote.